These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9272746)

  • 1. IHAFF loudness contour test: reliability and effects of approach mode in normal-hearing subjects.
    Beattie RC; Huynh RC; Ngo VN; Jones RL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1997 Aug; 8(4):243-56. PubMed ID: 9272746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The contour test of loudness perception.
    Cox RM; Alexander GC; Taylor IM; Gray GA
    Ear Hear; 1997 Oct; 18(5):388-400. PubMed ID: 9360862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Relationship between pure-tone and speech loudness discomfort levels among hearing-impaired subjects.
    Beattie RC; Boyd RL
    J Speech Hear Disord; 1986 May; 51(2):120-5. PubMed ID: 3702359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Patterns of Aided Loudness Growth in Experienced Adult Listeners with Early-Onset Severe-Profound Hearing Loss.
    Gottermeier L; De Filippo C
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Jun; 29(6):457-476. PubMed ID: 29863461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of stimulus level on the speech perception abilities of children using cochlear implants or digital hearing aids.
    Davidson LS
    Ear Hear; 2006 Oct; 27(5):493-507. PubMed ID: 16957500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Long-term test-retest reliability of category loudness scaling in normal-hearing subjects using pure-tone stimuli.
    Rasmussen AN; Olsen SO; Borgkvist BV; Nielsen LH
    Scand Audiol; 1998; 27(3):161-7. PubMed ID: 9728776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.
    Keidser G; Grant F
    Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):501-15. PubMed ID: 11770672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems.
    Firszt JB; Holden LK; Skinner MW; Tobey EA; Peterson A; Gaggl W; Runge-Samuelson CL; Wackym PA
    Ear Hear; 2004 Aug; 25(4):375-87. PubMed ID: 15292777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. IV. Fitting hearing aids with multi-channel compression so as to restore 'normal' loudness for speech at different levels.
    Moore BC
    Br J Audiol; 2000 Jun; 34(3):165-77. PubMed ID: 10905450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Repeated Measurement of Absolute and Relative Judgments of Loudness: Clinical Relevance for Prescriptive Fitting of Aided Target Gains for soft, Comfortable, and Loud, But Ok Sound Levels.
    Formby C; Payne J; Yang X; Wu D; Parton JM
    Semin Hear; 2017 Feb; 38(1):26-52. PubMed ID: 28286363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Measurement of individual loudness functions by trisection of loudness ranges.
    Villchur E; Killion MC
    Ear Hear; 2008 Oct; 29(5):693-703. PubMed ID: 18769270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comfortable loudness level: stimulus effects, long-term reliability, and predictability.
    Cox RM
    J Speech Hear Res; 1989 Dec; 32(4):816-28. PubMed ID: 2601312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting: III. A general method for deriving initial fittings for hearing aids with multi-channel compression.
    Moore BC; Glasberg BR; Stone MA
    Br J Audiol; 1999 Aug; 33(4):241-58. PubMed ID: 10509859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting: II. Hearing aids with multi-channel compression.
    Moore BC; Alcántara JI; Stone MA; Glasberg BR
    Br J Audiol; 1999 Jun; 33(3):157-70. PubMed ID: 10439142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of threshold-based fitting strategies for nonlinear hearing aids.
    Stelmachowicz PG; Dalzell S; Peterson D; Kopun J; Lewis DL; Hoover BE
    Ear Hear; 1998 Apr; 19(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 9562535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Temporal integration of loudness in listeners with hearing losses of primarily cochlear origin.
    Buus S; Florentine M; Poulsen T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Jun; 105(6):3464-80. PubMed ID: 10380670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of clinical and real-life judgments of loudness discomfort.
    Filion PR; Margolis RH
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1992 May; 3(3):193-9. PubMed ID: 1581594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility.
    Johnson EE; Dillon H
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):441-59. PubMed ID: 21993050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Loudness discomfort levels and saturation levels in hearing aids prescribed for young persons.
    Israelsson B; Sandh A; Leijon A
    Scand Audiol; 1995; 24(4):257-64. PubMed ID: 8750755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reliability of the Contour Test in a population of adults with hearing loss.
    Palmer CV; Lindley GA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1998 Jun; 9(3):209-15. PubMed ID: 9644618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.